MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

CONFLATION OF NATIONAL BRIDGE INVENTORY DATABASE WITH TIGERBASED ROAD VECTORS

2012· article· en· W1973068771 on OpenAlexaff
Qiang Zhang, SJ Griffiths, M. Wollersheim, M. Lorraine Tighe, Chenyang Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueISPRS annals of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographic Information Systems Studies
Canadian institutionsGeoscience BC
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConflationBridge (graph theory)Geospatial analysisDatabaseComputer scienceSimilarity (geometry)Matching (statistics)Information retrievalData miningGeographyArtificial intelligenceCartographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The National Bridge Inventory (NBI) database provides detailed bridge information with full coverage in the United States. In the database, each bridge record has an associated geographic location, which makes it possible to match the NBI records with road vectors in a geospatial database. This paper presents our approach to conflating the NBI database with U.S. Census Bureau's Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (TIGER) road vectors based on a point-to-line matching algorithm, which combines both geometric and semantic similarity measurements. Experiments have shown that most NBI bridges can be successfully matched to TIGER road vectors with an overall success rate over 80%. The matched results are then used to help define linear features for bridges in the road database. The resultant road databases have enhanced bridge information and are further used in creating a 3D road database. The proposed methodology has been fully implemented and has been used in various applications.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.835
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.096
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISPRS annals of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciencesSame topicGeographic Information Systems StudiesFrench-language works237,207